Police said the collision, at the intersection of Mercer Street and Terry Avenue North, was caused when the SUV ran a red light and was hit by the streetcar.
I’m feeling like that thing is worth every penny right about now.
Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?
Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!
THAT SLUT!!!!!!!!
Hey Will, the link is wrong…
Lee @ 2
Fixed!
..and this is a surprise? Rail on streets get in traffic wrecks. Fact of life.
the first of many such events, better to hit a SLUT than a bike
Er…non story. But cute. It was a minor dent…the street car was running again as soon as the police left.
Gee, even the magic solution, more buses & cars, get hit too. So what do you want? We could build an elevated track (monorail) above the street. Nope, we didn’t like that. Could extend the bus/rail tunnel to new stops. Nope, too expensive. I KNOW, lets do NOTHING! It’s what we’ve done for 50 years and it’s worked out SO well..why change now?
Lets just tell everyone to take their toy bicycles everywhere…because everyone is super fit, enjoys biking in 39 degree rain for miles, has no injuries, has no cargo, isn’t transporting other people. Problem solved! I know, lets tear up all the streets (along with the rail) and build NOTHING but bike paths everywhere! We’ll smooth out all the bumps, holes and little grooves that could catch their precious little toy tires… ;-)
Hey, Seriously, I totally like your idea. It’s environmentally responsible. I’ll concede that not everybody is super fit or has no injuries, but they make a produnct now called a cargo-bike, and when it’s 39 degrees and raining you can use a thing called a jacket.
Tearing up the existing streets might be a bit unnecessary, just patch the potholes (and if you outlaw the motorists the repairs will actually last!) and get biking!
Thanks for the suggestion.
At the current rate, how long will it take the SLUT(s) to clear the streets of SUVs?
And will any bikers survive to see the glorious day?
OK…both The Times and P-I leads read as: “SUV hit by SLUT” but since the SUV is the one at fault would it not be more prudent to say “SUV hits SLUT”…good god i hate our papers
This is why I hate bicyclists. ;) Joking aside, I know they’re not serious, I know they understand it’s just a hobby for fun. But ONCE and a while you get one of the lunatics who actually THINKS bicycles are a real transit mode. Lets get grandma and her bad hip on a bicycle. And just carry that 12 shirts from your dry cleaners along with you. Going to the symphony? Just bike it bitch! I’m sure they have a shower there where you can clean up and change into your suit. LOL. Bicycles are NEVER useful except for very short, individual trips where you carry nothing that can’t fit into a backpack and have a shower waiting for you where ever you go (and those of your who don’t shower, we know who you are…think your underarm deodorant handles those hills? On behalf of everyone else in your office, let me tell you, it doesn’t)
Seriously, stop it. Bicycles, roller blades, slake boards are NOT transit options. Just fun. Motorcycles which can go over 100mph and cross country aren’t even a ‘solution’ (though I love my Honda ST1300) There are times it doesn’t work. There are times you NEED a car, a truck, a train, a cab, or walking is fine. Lets stop pretending ONE method will fix everything. Obviously we need MULTIPLE forms…you know, like EVERY major city has.
@10
Dude, calm down. I bike to work and the store quite frequently. Bikes make perfectly good sense for some trips. No one is pretending that there is one method that will fix everything, or that everything can even be fixed.
Seriously @ 10
maybe if Grandma had been riding a bike all these years she wouldn’t have a bad hip.
Please stop calling my transportation mode a toy and I’ll refrain from insinuating that your rice-rocket sport touring machine is your way of compensating for something.
Do I think that bicycles are the only transportation answer? No, but we all need to drastically change the way we think about internal combustion, and if that means we have to re-think issues of dress code at the symphony and personal hygiene at the stuffy downtown law-firm and the expectation of travelling at 100 miles per hour then we might need to do that.
That seems better to me than my grandchild killing your grandchild to eat him.
I know…I’ll take my blood pressure medicine. :)
But it’s like folks arguing creationism as science, it’s so silly it just gets me going. Bikes make perfectly good sense on very very very few trips. Look outside today. Your biking options are kinda limited except for the most ‘Xtreme bike enthusiasts. Your normal folk are not going outside on a bike today.
The trips that could be done on bike instead of I-5 or I-405 are so few and to be statistically moot. Sorry, it’s true. Yes, if you live within short distance of your job, you can bike it regularly, and that’s COOL, but then you probably wouldn’t be on I-5 even if you took a car (say from Fremont to downtown). You can tell the folks on I-5 they shouldn’t live in Maple Valley and have a job in Seattle…but that’s a different argument than ‘bike transit’.
My point is just that bikes are cute, but are so massively limited that they have nothing to do with ‘traffic’ as a whole. We’re not talking about the 2 mile drives from Ballard to Queen Ann, we’re talking about the Renton to Seattle interstate/bridge commutes…the viaduct…the billion dollar transit options…which no more than 0.01% of people will ever do on a bicycle.
#12 I actually agree (mostly). I just think bikes aren’t a solution. If you live close enough to use them, you probably aren’t a big traffic user anyway. The REAL problem is getting people to stop living in the sprawling suburbs. The real problem is moving away from oil/gas engines. The real problem is not having good long distance (rail) transit available. Those are big things we need to work on. Once we get people to live close enough to work that they COULD bike it, then the traffic problem would already be 95% solved. That’s my point, not that bikes are “stupid” just that they aren’t a solution, just an indicator that you’ve already removed yourself from the significant portion of the travel problem.
14 A—-Men! The eventual solution will have to be for the majority of people to live closer to where they work. That’s going to take a great deal of change throughout the social fabric. Remember when everyone was first getting all excited about the Internet and it was being predicted that lots and lots of people would be able to telecommute? Doesn’t seem to have quite turned out that way. There have been several reasons for this, but one of them seems to be that senior executives like to have big impressive buildings full of busy-looking people to serve as monuments to their own greatness.
The solutions are fairly obvious.
Look at Europe. Denser zoning, prettier architecture, nicer boulevards, many more bicycles, metropolitan rail systems, more robust bus systems. Intercity rail systems.
Can you imagine a 200 mph train to Portland or Vancouver? Why is this not being built now, when the land needed for the train is not so expensive?
It appears there is no social planning and the default is to let the area grow until the eficient rail systems become too expensive.
Instead of building up the systems Seattle obviously lacks, people argue endlessly about which system to build up.
I suspect this also has to do with the fact that people seem to want low taxes, but one cannot build the necessary social infrastructures, without large amounts of public funds. And more contributions by the wealthy.
This has been solved in Europe through dominance, generally, of the social democratic parties.
The Democrats in the USA seem incapable of even discussing the tax system and social investments that have been proven to be functional in many other nations all over the world. One cannot build without taxes, one cannot tax without one talks about taxes and without one talks about the burdens on the wealthy and the lower burdens and greater benefits to the many.
Let’s test the SLUT for lead!
They didn’t say what model SUV it was. But I’m wondering…
If the SUV was a H2 or H3… would the headline read:
“SLUT bangs with Hummer”
@16
Right fuckin’ on. You pretty much nailed it.
“Seriously, stop it. Bicycles, roller blades, slake boards are NOT transit options.”
How then did I cover the nine miles to work and back, every working day this summer?
“Bicycles are NEVER useful except for very short, individual trips where you carry nothing that can’t fit into a backpack and have a shower waiting for you where ever you go…”
Um, I rode from home to work, from work to the gym, and from the gym to home. (I carried my breakfasts, lunches, and fancy work duds.) All of these places have showers. (Is nine miles ‘short’ in your world? I was once told it was the average length of the American commute.)
Ironically, the building in which I work has both acres of free parking, and a room for bikes. Guess which one is now filled to capacity, every day?
P.S. Can I borrow your “slake board”? Maybe it won’t dump me on my ass, like those boards with wheels always did.
18:
Or how ’bout “SLUT bangs with Explorer”?
How about signs showing a car blowing though a traffic signal reading : Warning! Red Light Zone – Sluts Bump and Grind
Paddy Mac you are some sort of statistical freak – possibly you don’t exist. You are however, apparently, super fit, and cute (maybe it was your bike which is cute), though he (or she) “hates” you (oh, and you stink whether you know it or not). Seriously’s messaging is a little muddled, maybe he (or she – though we all know it’s a he) should have his exhaust system checked for leaks.
Seriously, I’m glad you think you agree (mostly) but there you go again with the ad hominem diminutization. Cute? You said above that your “point is just that bikes are cute,[…] but […] they have nothing to do with ‘traffic’ as a whole.” Bikes are traffic. You then go on to define what “we” are talking about: “Renton to Seattle interstate/bridge commutes”
No, actually we were talking about the SouthLakeUnionTrolley, but as long as you’ve opened the door, from what conservative think tank do you get you 0.01% figure? I think it’s already higher than that.
http://www.seattle.gov/transpo.....rogram.htm
My regular commute across the Interstate-90 bridge is actually pretty sweet; I’ve run pre- and post-work errands to and from Renton too.
My point is: eventually everybody gets off the freeway, and when you do, you’ll see some cyclists and pedestrians (and trolleys) and they’re all traffic; they’re the part that is (part of) the solution to the problem you’re causing by insisting that “you NEED a car.”
So treat them with some fucking respect, asshole!
7:28 am and no passengers on the SLUT as it hit the SUV. I wonder how many passengers were on the route 70 that goes through the area now “serviced” by the SLUT?